Legislature(2023 - 2024)SENATE FINANCE 532
02/15/2023 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Federal Infrastructure Funding in Alaska | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 15, 2023
9:00 a.m.
9:00:36 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stedman called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Donny Olson, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Jesse Kiehl
Senator Kelly Merrick
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Katherine Keith, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities; Mike Anderson, Acting
Infrastructure Coordinator, Office of the Governor; James
Marks, Director, Program Development, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities.
SUMMARY
PRESENTATION: FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING IN ALASKA
Co-Chair Stedman discussed the agenda. He relayed that the
committee would most likely have several related meetings
as it considered the capital budget and //
^PRESENTATION: FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING IN ALASKA
9:02:04 AM
KATHERINE KEITH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, introduced herself
and discussed her background. She had been appointed as
deputy commissioner two months previously. She introduced
her team. She offered a brief background of her work with
the department.
9:03:00 AM
MIKE ANDERSON, ACTING INFRASTRUCTURE COORDINATOR, OFFICE OF
THE GOVERNOR, introduced himself and discussed his
background. He had been in his role for three weeks. Before
his current role he worked as a special assistant to the
governor working on public safety and criminal justice
matters.
Co-Chair Stedman asked Mr. Anderson to discuss the number
of employees in his office.
Mr. Anderson conveyed that he was the sole member of the
office. He recounted that the legislature had allocated a
$1 million budget for a fully staffed office of 4, but
currently the office consisted of himself and a private
contractor. He said that they were working on a massive
opportunity tracker, trying to track every opportunity
for the state and contractors related to the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIGA). He relayed that they were
in the early stages.
Co-Chair Stedman requested that the presenter pause after
each slide for questions.
9:05:30 AM
Mr. Anderson addressed a presentation entitled "Senate
Finance: Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in Transportation,"
(copy on file). He looked at slide 2, " looked at slide 2,
"NATIONWIDE IIJA* IN TRANSPORTATION":
Funds highway programs for five years (FFY 22-26) with
$567.1 B
More than a dozen new programs for highways, bridges,
transit, and airports
• Formula: resilience, carbon reduction, bridges, and
electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure
• Discretionary: bridges, EV charging infrastructure,
rural projects, resilience, wildlife crossings, and
reconnecting communities
More opportunities for local governments and other
non-traditional entities to access new funding.
Mr. Anderson said that the IIJA had been signed into law in
November 2022, and was a once in a generation funding
package that would address the nations aging
infrastructure. He stated that the legislation would
modernize highways and bridges and revitalize the Alaska
Marine Highway System (AMHS). He detailed that IIJA
included a 5-year reauthorization from FY22 to FY26
(federal fiscal years) of surface transportation programs
and direct advance appropriations. He understood that
existing formula fund had an increase, while others were
discretionary. He said that included were more than a dozen
new programs for highways and aviation. He shared that it
included the largest federal investment ever in public
transit, the largest dedicated bridge investment, and the
largest investment in clean energy and electric vehicle
infrastructure in the nations history.
9:07:26 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman looked at the $350.8 billion for the
Federal Highway Administration reflected on slide 2. He
asked whether new roads would be built.
Mr. Anderson answered in the affirmative.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked what involvement the legislature
would have in the designation process.
Ms. Keith responded that there was a capital program that
included significant construction, which would be discussed
with the committee.
9:08:38 AM
Mr. Anderson spoke to slide 3, "US DOT IIJA FOCUS AREAS":
Safety
Climate
Economic Strength
Equity
Transformation
Workforce
Mr. Anderson recounted that the origin of the legislation
had included these themes. He thought if the state's needs
were married with the list of focus areas they would align.
He thought the sub focus of tribes, underserved areas, the
impact of changing climate, has been taken into account
with the creation of the bill and would be considered when
distributing discretionary awards.
9:10:19 AM
Mr. Anderson referenced slide 4, "FUNDING AVAILABLE TO A
RANGE OF RECIPIENTS," which showed a table with a myriad of
IIJA programs, and the different eligibility that would
empower stakeholders to apply for discretionary grants. He
knew that DOT was finding new ways of partnering with
organizations such as Southeast Conference and the Prince
Willian Sound Economic District. He expressed pride in the
collaboration that was taking place between stakeholders
and the administration to capitalize on the funding.
9:11:37 AM
Mr. Anderson turned to slide 5, " NATIONWIDE FEDERAL-AID
HIGHWAY APPORTIONMENTS PROGRAMS," which showed a bar graph.
He noted that the United States (U.S) Department of
Transportation Federal Highway Administration had released
$59.9 billion, nationwide, in FY23 for programs. The slide
showed five years of the six original federal highway aid
apportionment programs. He listed programs from the slide:
•NHPP National Highways Performance Program (~58%)
•STBG Surface Transportation Block Grants (~27%)
•HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program (~6%)
•CMAQ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (~5%)
•MPO PL Metropolitan Planning Organization Planning
(~1%)
•NHFP National Highways Freight Program (~3%)
He explained that the two new projects in green on the
graph were the Promoting Resilient Operations To
Transformative Efficient and Cost saving Transportation
(PROTECT) and the Carbon Reduction program.
9:13:12 AM
Mr. Anderson considered slide 6, "FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION: NATIONWIDE IIJA," which showed a pie chart
and bar graph depicting increased formula and competitive
funding. He stated that the recent AMHS award had come from
this funding. He detailed the increased funding to each
area illustrated on the slide.
9:14:26 AM
Senator Bishop referenced the note on the bottom of slide
6:
Note: Total funding shown includes authorization trust
fund contract authority, authorized annual
appropriations for FY22 and certain advance
appropriations for FY22 enacted as a part of the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. annual appropriations
are subject to Congressional action.
Co-Chair Bishop understood that the funding was available
for a nationwide competitive grant for only FY22.
Ms. Keith replied in the affirmative.
Senator Bishop assumed that he should not get too excited
for a $300 million Railcar Replacement Program.
Mr. Anderson agreed.
9:14:58 AM
Mr. Anderson displayed slide 7, "FAA FUNDING: NATIONWIDE
AIR TRANSPORT SYSTEM." He cited that under IIJA, airports
in the state were expected to receive approximately $392
million over 5 years. He said that the funding would
address airside and landside needs at airports, such as
improving runways, taxiways, and airport owned towers;
terminal development projects; noise reduction projects;
there would be $5 million available nationwide that would
be discretionary funds.
9:15:39 AM
Ms. Keith highlighted slide 8, "FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION
FUNDING IN ALASKA," which showed a bar graph illustrating
federal transportation funding in the state. She thought
that everyone was aware that Alaska had not kept up with
the infrastructure needs across the state. She cited that
the American Society of Civil Engineers had graded the
state a "C-minus". She explained that the slide showed some
details of different funding sources, and the increases
over the years. She pointed out that funding had gone from
$830million in 2020 to over $1 billion in IIGA
apportionments for 2023.
Co-Chair Stedman expressed the committee's concern with
inflation and the ability to do new projects. He thought
there had been a lot of optimism when the IIJA first
passed, but that had deflated due to inflation.
9:17:54 AM
Senator Bishop dovetailed on Co-Chair Stedman's comments
and asked Ms. Keith to address any project escalation costs
from engineers estimates to awarded final bids.
9:18:25 AM
Ms. Keith looked at slide 9, " FEDERAL FORMULA PROGRAMS,"
which showed increases in funding by program. She noted
that many of the programs were formula programs that
received annual funding. She highlighted the increase in
funding for the aforementioned new programs. She said that
the graph on the right of the slide addressed some
inflation questions. She stated that the first column
showed federal fiscal year funding for 2022 through 2026,
with the estimated adjustment for inflation. The second
column showed funding for the same timeline using the IIJA
funding. She said that IIJA was looking to add an inflation
factor to the funding.
9:19:46 AM
JAMES MARKS, DIRECTOR, PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, explained that IIJA
accounted for inflation, but not at the rate currently
experienced nationwide. He lamented that the rate of
inflation was outpacing the projected rate of 2.4 percent,
which had led to concerns that the funds would not procure
as much as had been expected.
Co-Chair Stedman thought that last year many projects had
faced the challenge of a 20 to 20 percent inflation rate.
9:21:28 AM
Ms. Keith noted that there were significant cost increases
were forcing the department to request additional funding.
Mr. Marks detailed that DOT had heard from the Association
of General Contractors (AGC) that the usual way of
estimating project costs was moot. He had heard from AGC
that that they had seen cost escalation of 20 percent
nationwide. He relayed that the changes were not consistent
between projects, and at times were related to capacity
issues. Alternatively, there were some projects that were
coming in below the estimated cost. He noted that the
department was still grappling with how to manage the
estimation process. There was a delay in being able to
address some of the issues related to inflation.
9:23:42 AM
Ms. Keith addressed slide 10, " DOT&PF STRATEGIC INVESTMENT
AREAS," which showed a pie chart of strategic investment
areas for the department. She relayed that the department
had launched a public engagement effort and had received
over 3,000 comments from Alaskans. She highlighted areas of
public interest, such as safe and secure transportation.
She spoke to the needs charted on the slide. She described
those projects under "other" included workforce development
and training.
9:26:32 AM
Ms. Keith advanced to slide 11, " SAFETY":
Safe Streets and Roads for All
Highway Safety
Improvement Program (HSIP)
Wildlife Crossings Pilot
Program
Ms. Keith noted that there were several programs within
IIJA that addressed safety. She stated that over five
years, Alaska would receive about $15 million in formula
funding for highway safety traffic programs. The funding
represented about a 30 percent increase from previous
years. She said that local and tribal government were
eligible to receive the funding to develop an action plan
to reduce crashes and fatalities.
9:27:46 AM
Ms. Keith looked at slide 12, "SAFE ICE ROADS FOR
ALASKANS," which addressed the Safe Ice Roads for Alaskans
(SIRA) Program. She stressed that the ice roads were
necessary for the movement of people and goods in remote
communities.
9:28:34 AM
Ms. Keith showed slide 13, "ECONOMIC VITALITY":
National Highways Freight Program (NHFP)
Local and Regional Project Assistance Program
Changes to INFRA Program
Rural Surface Transportation Grants
Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP)
Ms. Keith relayed that the states freight corridors had 46
percent of imported and exported commodities, by weight,
and the state had over 12,000 miles of designated freight
corridors. She said that the department had look at how
much had been invested in the infrastructure of Alaksa
coastline. She said that ports and harbors were eligible
for much of the IIJA funds. She discussed the Port
Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP) and noted that
several communities were interested in the program.
9:30:10 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked for more detail regarding harbors.
He noted that the state had turned over most harbors to
local cities and boroughs and had provided matching funds
for rebuilds. He asked if communities would qualify for the
IIJA funds or only docks owned by the state.
Ms. Keith affirmed that a lot of the state's ports and
harbors were owned by local entities. She said that the
funds were meant to support transportation across the
state. She relayed that the Alaska Municipal League (AML)
had been assisting with identifying the strongest
applicants for the funds. She said that local communities
were encouraged to put forth projects for submission.
9:31:47 AM
Senator Bishop asked whether there was a maximum amount for
the program by participant.
Ms. Keith answered affirmatively and thought the maximum
was roughly $28 million.
Senator Bishop commented that the figure was on the next
slide.
Ms. Keith said that the program was capped at a certain
dollar amount. She said would provide more details to the
committee. She noted that the program was highly
competitive.
9:33:26 AM
Ms. Keith referenced slide 14, " RURAL PORTS, DOCKS & BARGE
LANDINGS."
Co-Chair Stedman noted that there were many ports paid for
by private enterprises and not subsidized by the state. He
asked if the private ports would be eligible for the funds.
Ms. Keith relayed that there was a lot of expanded
eligibility for other shipyard improvement programs.
Co-Chair Stedman noted that the state owned a shipyard.
9:34:27 AM
Ms. Keith turned to slide 15, " STATE OF GOOD REPAIR":
State Preservation & Maintenance Program (NHPP & STBG)
Transportation Asset Management Program (TAMP)
Bridge-related Provisions in IIJA
Ms. Keith said that the bigger shipyard in Ketchikan was
very interested in part improvement programs. She noted
that there was significant funding in IIJA to work towards
improving the reliability of the state's transportation
network, includeing $3.7 billion, over 5 years, in federal
highway formula funding for highways and bridges. The state
could also compete for about $15.8 billion in Bridge
Investment Program, which supported economically
significant bridges.
9:36:01 AM
Ms. Keith considered slide 16, "COMMUNITY BRIDGE PROGRAM":
Cycle
Every 2 years
NOFO
CY2023 Quarter 1
Amount
$54,000,000
Eligible Activities
Bridges on the National Bridge Inventory (NBI),
replacing poor bridges, rehabilitating fair bridges,
bridge preservation & protection, tribally owned
bridges on public roads, and projects that
replace/rehabilitate culverts on the NBI
Eligible Entities
Local or community government, villages, tribal
entities, & Political sub-divisions of government
Ms. Keith said a notice of funding opportunity would be
released at the end of the first quarter.
9:36:48 AM
AT EASE
9:37:21 AM
RECONVENED
Senator Wilson asked how many projects the department
planned to award of the $54 million.
Ms. Keith relayed that the department looked forward to the
quality of the applications and the readiness of the
projects.
Senator Wilson did not think $54 million seemed like a
large amount of funding to serve many communities.
9:38:16 AM
Senator Bishop thought the $54 million was for one quarter
and not for a full 5-year span.
Ms. Keith relayed that the $54 million was for two years of
funding and a notice of funding would be issued every two
years for applicants to consider.
9:38:47 AM
Ms. Keith displayed slide 17, "SUSTAINABILITY":
Carbon Reduction Program (CRP)
Charging and Fueling Infrastructure
National Electric Vehicle Formula Program (NEVI)
Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program
Reductions of Truck Emissions at Port Facilities
Program
Ms. Keith stressed the benefit of getting communities off
diesel fuel. She said that the department would partner
with the Alaska Energy Authority on the NEVI program.
9:40:19 AM
Ms. Keith highlighted slide 18, which showed a table of
detail on the NEVI Program listed on the previous slide:
Cycle
Every 2 years
NOFO
CY2023 Quarter 2
Amount
$52,000,000
Eligible Activities
The acquisition, installation, and network connection
of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations; Proper
operation and maintenance of EV charging stations;
and, Long-term EV charging station data sharing
Eligible Entities
Local or community government, villages, tribal
entities, & Political sub-divisions of government
9:41:16 AM
Senator Wilson asked how many projects the state planned to
fund and whether the state was working with communities to
assure an equal distribution of charging stations across
the state.
Ms. Keith answered affirmatively and explained that AEA and
the department had launched an extensive engagement
campaign with communities about EV stations. With the first
round of funding that would go out in the current quarter,
there would be five to seven awards. She furthered that
communities had other ways to engage with the program. She
commented that the charging stations required approximately
$1 million to build.
Senator Wilson asked about the annual maintenance for the
charging stations.
Ms. Keith noted that the maintenance was not as much as the
upfront capital cost. She said that the charging stations
were not a revenue generating opportunity and the state was
looking at the possibility of private entities helping to
maintain the stations into the future.
9:43:47 AM
Senator Kiehl thought the charging stations carried a large
price tag. He wondered whether the charging stations being
discussed were installed far from existing three-phase
power. He wondered why installation was so expensive.
Ms. Keith explained that 4, level 3 chargers would be
installed that included broadband and the electrical
infrastructure to maintain the fast-charging requirements.
She acknowledged that the $1 million was a significant
price tag for installation.
Co-Chair Stedman asked for more detail regarding the
charging stations, and whether the state would be
responsible for the maintenance going forward.
Ms. Keith explained that the maintenance and operations
would ideally be on private entities that entered into
agreements with the state. The agreements and
implementation of the awards indicated that the private
entities would maintain the stations.
9:45:38 AM
Senator Merrick asked about the number of electric vehicles
in the state.
Ms. Keith replied in the hundreds. There was an expectation
of a massive increase in electric vehicles nationwide. She
believed that over the next 5 years the percentage of users
would increase.
Co-Chair Stedman asked Ms. Keith to include the location of
the vehicles when she provided information about the number
of vehicles. He thought it would be interesting to see how
the vehicles would operate in a climate like Fairbanks. He
asked for additional information about where the locations
should be targeted.
Ms. Keith relayed that there was a lot of research on the
efficiency of batteries in cold climates. She said that
there was an efficiency loss in cold climates but that
owners found the vehicles economically viable.
Co-Chair Stedman thought the committee would also be
interested in the source of the energy being used by
electric cars.
9:48:55 AM
Ms. Keith looked at slide 19, " RESILIENCY":
PROTECT (formula and discretionary)
Changes to Emergency Relief Program
Other Climate and Resilience Provisions
Ms. Keith cited projects to support resiliency would help
with costal shore protection, increased culvert sizes, and
to address repairs from the West Coast Alaska storm.
9:49:56 AM
Ms. Keith addressed slide 20, Resiliency & Coastal
Protection Program:
5 yr total PROTECT program funds
$93.1m
Eligible Activities
Resiliency Planning
Twice-Hit Assets
Critical Community Access
Evacuation Routes
At-Risk Coastal Community Protection
Eligible Entities
Local or community government, villages, tribal
entities, & political sub-divisions of government
9:50:34 AM
Ms. Keith advanced to slide 21, which showed a map and
graph depicting West Coast Alaska storm damages. The
infrastructure damage was estimated to exceed $210 million.
Senator Bishop had a question on slide 20. He asked whether
river communities were eligible to apply for the Resiliency
and Coastal Protection Program.
Ms. Keith replied in the affirmative.
9:52:18 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman noted that the Resiliency and Coastal
Protection Program was a 5-year program. He thought that
erosion control costs would exceed the amount awarded for
the program. He asked whether the program offered false
expectations to communities that were at-risk. He cited
that with climate change, there were tens, if not hundreds,
of communities that would be affected by erosion.
Ms. Keith acknowledged that the need was extreme, as
described by Co-Chair Hoffman. She said that the department
was looking at ways to address the matter.
9:54:01 AM
Senator Wilson looked at slide 21, which included an
estimate of $210 million. He asked how much the state
planned on being reimbursed from insurance and FEMA costs
and how long would it take the department to survey the
other 10 communities.
Ms. Keith relayed that the department's primary focus was
to gather data from communities to be eligible for
reimbursement. Currently, harsh winter weather has not
allowed for travel to all communities and those places
would be visited in the spring. She commented on the
complexity of the reimbursement situation. She mentioned
working with communities that had submitted FEMA requests
and stressed that the situation was challenging.
9:56:24 AM
Senator Wilson asked whether DOT had a goal in mind for
reimbursement by other agencies.
Ms. Keith expected that the department's goal would be 100
percent. She thought some of the FEMA eligibilities were 90
percent, and some of the PROTECT program eligibilities were
80 percent. She described it as a patchwork of funding.
9:57:13 AM
Co-Chair Stedman referenced the many homes destroyed in the
most recent storm. He wanted Ms. Keith to get back to the
committee with information on FEMA's restrictions. He
thought that FEMA would expect people to rebuild off the
waterfront. He was concerned with what policy impacts FEMA
would have on the state in aiding Alaskans. He understood
that to get a house insured, flood zone regulations had to
be considered.
Ms. Keith replied that DOT worked with DMVA to communicate
with FEMA. She continued that FEMA had had an individual
assistance program and worked directly with homeowners.
She said that the department was working to ensure that
FEMA guidance would work quickly to assist Alaskans in
need. She said that there had not been conversations about
individual cases for the damage in Golovin.
Co-Chair Stedman strongly recommended having conversations
on the topic. He recalled viewing the area from a
helicopter and witnessing vast empty neighborhoods. He
relayed a concern about the impact FEMA would have on
rebuilding houses, and he stressed the importance of
understanding the issue in Western Alaska, and throughout
the state. He understood that there was a nationwide
policy, with nationwide calculated premiums and he thought
to ignore the matter was perilous.
10:02:20 AM
Co-Chair Stedman requested information about the claims pai
by FEMA versus insurance companies. He thought there would
be a difference between what Alaskans paid in premiums
versus what was collected.
10:02:35 AM
Ms. Keith looked at slide 22, "GEOGRAPHIC AREAS BY
STRATEGIC INVESTMENT AREA," which showed a bar graph with
areas of investment broken down by geographic areas in the
state including corridor, rural, statewide, urban, and
waterway. She said that the slide was conceptual to help
understand where target investment should happen across the
state.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about where areas such as Southeast
would fall in the strategic planning.
Ms. Keith relayed that anything coastal or river-based
would be categorized as a "waterway." She used the example
of marine highway investments. She mentioned the challenge
of defining projects as "rural," and used the example of
projects not connected to the road system, such as in
Ketchikan. She said that downtown Anchorage and Fairbanks
would be considered urban.
10:06:00 AM
Senator Bishop asked for the meaning of SOGR on the slide.
Ms. Keith answered, "state of good repair."
10:06:17 AM
Ms. Keith spoke to slide 23, "COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIPS":
RPO
• Copper River Valley - RTPO statutes
• Others on the way FNSB, NSB, and more.
AML MOU
• Clearinghouse "The HUB"
• AML Hosting NHI Courses
State Agencies
• AEA MOA - NEVI Plan & STEP
• DNR MOA ASTAR PEL
Business Partnership
• AGC
• ACEC
Team-Embedded Consultants
Federal Land Managers
More Local Planning
• Coordinate with land-use, 'Plan for People
Looking for more Partners!
Senator Kiehl thought the partnerships were a great
development and a great expansion on how DOT had
historically worked. He asked for commentary on the
timeframe for projects, and whether there was a rush to get
applications completed.
Mr. Anderson understood that the IIJA funding had a five-
year window of allocated monies, with more of a ten-year
window for getting projects to development.
10:09:13 AM
Senator Bishop looked at partnerships listed on slide 23
and thought there should be labor and apprenticeship
programs listed.
10:09:37 AM
Senator Wilson appreciated all the partnerships and
assistance with applications. He asked whether the state
worked with any entities to help them to be more
competitive on the national level.
Ms. Keith affirmed that the department was assisting
Alaskan applicants. She furthered that AML was taking the
lead in working with the various entities. She acknowledged
that it took a certain amount of training to write
successful grants. She noted that the assistance required
funding and that the department was committed to the grant
writing efforts.
10:11:21 AM
Senator Wilson asked whether DOT had enough resources in
its current and upcoming budget to continue to help
communities apply for funding.
10:11:50 AM
Ms. Keith referenced slide 24, which gave examples of
discretionary grants that had been submitted through the
partnership with AML, totaling $850 million. She
highlighted that the Rual Ferry Program had been
successful.
10:12:22 AM
Ms. Keith turned to slide 25, which showed a timeline of
the rural ferry service grant. She shared that the IIJA had
been passed in November 2021, which was one month before
the governor's proposed budget was released. She said that
the notice of funding opportunity from the federal Transit
Administration had not been issued until July of 2022, and
the state submitted grant application two months later,
which meant that requests for funding in the governors
proposed budget had been based on what the department
thought the criteria would be for the program. She stated
that notice of the award had been received in January 2022,
but the budget proposal had already been submitted. She
said that the department had been working with OMB to
understand how to find federal match for the program.
Co-Chair Stedman understood that there had been a delay and
some complication with understanding how the federal funds
would come to the state. He affirmed that the legislature
would work with the department through the subcommittee
process.
Ms. Keith expressed the department's appreciation for the
dialogue and support from the legislature.
10:15:19 AM
Ms. Keith considered slide 26, which showed FTA awards of
discretionary grants. She relayed that the department
planned to balance the capital request by maintaining the
existing fleet and investing in new infrastructure. The
maintenance and upgrade repairs had been split 50/50 with
ferry terminals and shoreside infrastructure, and vessels.
The other 50 percent of the capital funding had gone toward
new vessels.
10:15:57 AM
Senator Wilson expressed concern over the amount of funds
required for designing a new Alaska mainliner. He wondered
whether the designs would be compatible with existing
docks.
Ms. Keith relayed that in the previous year's budget, the
legislature had granted authority for the department to
spend $30 million towards the design of a new main liner.
The department had a projected capital expense of $350
million. She said that the department was looking for ways
to reduce costs. She noted that some of the design for the
M/V Tustumena replacement vessel would carry over to the
new mainliner. She added that all ships and all docks would
be compatible.
Senator Wilson wondered whether the price could be lower
since the state had designed mainliners before.
Ms. Keith stressed that reduction of costs for design was a
priority, and it was important to design a vessel that
worked for the state.
Co-Chair Stedman stressed that the legislature wanted the
M/V Tustumena replaced. He agreed with Senator Wilson that
building docks that ferries could not tie to was
dysfunctional and hoped for alignment going forward.
Ms. Keith agreed with Co-Chair Stedman. She said that
because of the funding the shipyard RFP would be out soon,
and the hope was to deliver a replacement vessel by 2027.
She added that the second main liner had been added so that
when a shipyard was onboard with the project, they would
have the capability of building a second vessel and ideally
reducing some of the cost.
10:20:54 AM
Co-Chair Stedman said that the legislature would work with
the department to take successful advantage of the funding
opportunity. He shared that there would be a conversation
specific to AMHS in the future. He appreciated the
departments initiative in going after the grants.
10:22:28 AM
Ms. Keith displayed slide 27, " FTA AWARDS: VESSELS,":
Vessel Modernization$72 million award
•Columbia modernization
•Matanuskamodernization
•Tazlinaincreased route options
•Kennicottimproved environmental considerations
Vessel ReplacementTustumena Replacement Vessel$68.5
million award
ncludes design updates of propulsion system,
for safer, more efficient, public transportation
Design of a New Alaska Mainliner--$8.5 million award
Supports the early steps for capital replacement of a
mainliner for continued service to SE Alaska
Climate Responsive Ferry Vessel Options$46 million
award
Increase service, efficiency, and sustainability of
Alaska Ferry System for rural port communities.
Co-Chair Stedman asked Ms. Keith to get back to the
committee regarding the M/V Matanuska. He referenced
concern on environmental issues such as asbestos, and
corrosion of steel. He expressed concern that the ship
might not sail again, which he thought was not in the
states best interest.
10:24:20 AM
Senator Kiehl wanted to hear back from the department
regarding the flexibility of which vessels to focus on.
Ms. Keith was happy to get back to the committee with
detailed responses. She said that she hoped for flexibility
with the awards.
10:25:50 AM
Ms. Keith discussed slide 28, FTA AWARDS: DOCKS:
Increase the sustainability of five current rural AMHS
port operations; the project will upgrade dock
infrastructure in Juneau and Cordova, and replace
current docks in Pelican, Tatitlek, and Chenega.
Prince William Sound Dock Modifications$29.3m
project total
Tatitlek $10.5m
Chenega $12.6m
Cordova $6.2m
10:26:33 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman noted that there were other infrastructure
ferry docks in Western Alaska. He assumed they were in
pristine condition and did not need to be modernized. He
mentioned Kodiak, and Unalaska, and asked about the plans
for the facilities.
Ms. Keith relayed that DOT did annual infrastructure
inspections of all facilities and had a good listing of the
state of health of all facilities. She noted that the dock
in Kodiak needed improvement and that this had been a topic
of conversation within the department.
Co-Chair Stedman asked Ms. Keith to get back to the
committee regarding the status of the facilities mentioned
by Senator Hoffman.
10:28:20 AM
Ms. Keith looked at slide 29, ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE:
WORKFORCE
COMMUNICATION
CULTURE
INNOVATION
INFORMATION
RESOURCING
PROJECT DELIVERY
Ms. Keith shared that the department was working to get
projects shovel ready, so they did not miss out on
opportunities for funding. She said that project delivery
was a priority for the department.
10:30:07 AM
Ms. Keith addressed slide 30, " 2023 CONSTRUCTION
WORKFORCE: UNIQUE WORKERS," which showed a pie chart of the
various construction workforce necessary to deliver
projects in the state. She noted the high number of workers
necessary in 2023 and lamented that there was a workforce
crunch within the department. She discussed the various
ways that the department could help with staffing within
the department and in the private sector.
Co-Chair Stedman asked Ms. Keith to work with Senator
Bishop on the topic of workforce development. He expressed
concern that the state did not have the workforce to bring
projects to fruition.
10:32:37 AM
Senator Wilson asked about the current areas of need
regarding staffing.
Co-Chair Stedman thought that the legislature would work
with the department to develop the states workforce.
10:33:37 AM
Senator Bishop wanted to recognize DOT on the caliber of
people in the department. He mentioned that $87 million had
been awarded to the state because of the work of the
department.
10:34:24 AM
Ms. Keith displayed slide 31, "Thank you."
Co-Chair Hoffman noted that the presentation did not
mention the Port of Alaska. He questioned whether the Port
of Alaska would be best managed by the City of Anchorage or
rather the state since the port services the entire state.
Co-Chair Stedman asked Ms. Keith to get back to the
committee.
Co-Chair Olson asked about slide 12. He noted the $2
million for ice roads and wondered how that funding
compared to the previous year.
Ms. Keith noted that the funding for the new program was
substantially higher than in the past. She shared that
previous funding for ice roads was via line-item allocation
to communities. She noted that this year there was a
program as well as separate allocations.
Co-Chair Olson asked whether Ms. Keith anticipated that
there would be more funds available considering the effects
of global warming on rural areas of the state.
Ms. Keith relayed that the University of Alaska had been
working on a study on the construction of ice roads. She
stressed the importance that the roads be constructed
safely.
10:37:42 AM
Co-Chair Olson asked about the Diomede ice runway. He
inquired as to whether DOT was still considering the
runway.
Ms. Keith did not have the information at hand and offered
to get back to the committee.
Co-Chair Stedman thanked the presenters. He related that he
was looking forward to working with the department on
matching the federal funds.
Co-Chair Stedman discussed housekeeping.
ADJOURNMENT
10:40:45 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 021523 SFC DOT&PF IIJA FINAL.pdf |
SFIN 2/15/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| S FIN 02-15-2023 DOTPF IIJA _Attachment02 - COL ENG ERR Columbia Oily Water Overboard Discharge.pdf |
SFIN 2/15/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| S FIN 02-15-2023 DOTPF IIJA _Attachment01 - 20230307 Matanuska Status Update.pdf |
SFIN 2/15/2023 9:00:00 AM |
|
| S FIN 02-15-2023 DOTPF IIJA - Responses to Committee (FINAL).pdf |
SFIN 2/15/2023 9:00:00 AM |